As the title suggests,
most of us have inconsistent beliefs about animals that don’t stand up to the
most casual analysis:

“How can 60% of Americans believe
simultaneously that animals have the right to live and people have the right to
eat them? Andrew looked up at me and said, ‘The only consistency in the way
humans think about animals is inconsistency.’ This book is my attempt to
explain this paradox.”p13

Herzog,
an anthrozoologist (check his site here), doesn’t get all high-and-mighty and judgemental, but he
does a brilliant job of looking at the psychology, science and arguments around
our approaches to animals.

“The paradoxes that plague
our interactions with other animals are due to the fact that much of our
thinking is a mire of instinct, learning, language, culture, intuition, and our
reliance on mental shortcuts.”p39

Indeed,
throughout the book Herzog makes a very persuasive argument that

“Most people’s views about
the treatment of other species exemplify what psychologists call ‘non-attitudes’
or ‘vacuous attitudes’. These are superficial collections of largely unrelated
and isolated opinions, not [a] coherent belief system…”p240

This is a rare book that
is very accessible, a fascinating read, yet seems to do justice to the science
it summarises. Herzog is honest in subjecting his own beliefs to critical analysis,
and it’s also a great introduction to anthrozoology.

If you’re in Sydney this
weekend don’t miss the RSPCA’s Reigning Cats and Dogs festival in Glebe (details in this post).

Veterinary Ethics: Navigating Tough Cases

WARNING

All images and content on this site are copyright Anne Fawcett unless stated otherwise and should not be reproduced without written permission. Please be aware that some surgical and clinical images are used on this site.